被媒体乱搅和搞得出离谱案例特别多
有人感兴趣可以去看看这部很新的纪实影片Amanda Knox 

这个案子呢，证人首先不需要律师辩护，所以刘鑫出来个什么律师实在令人费解，不该属实

所有媒体都一边倒的把这个道德败坏的观念压在刘鑫头上，刘鑫道德方面我不做评价。媒体这样是不对的，不利于案情的审理，媒体唯一做的就是公平报道！
Impartiality!

原因有几点，

辩方律师可以提出刘鑫证词的可靠性问题，刘鑫在巨大舆论压力给的证词可以做无效
A good Defense counsel would challenge base on the following,
Statement of the Key witness lack of creditability, given under duress, inconsistent with previous statement, inconsistent with police report.
Should Not be admissible.

开不开门，锁没锁，peephole看没看见都不是重点，最重要的环节是凶器的来源
那如果因为媒体狂轰滥炸而使刘鑫不说实话，这样使得她的证词失去效用，所有的证词都没用的话，就不能证明本案最重点的刀是不是她递出来的

Defense: key witness’s statement lack of creditability, facts showing that she could be delusional, she might have handed the knife out, no face proves that beyond reasonable doubt that she did not! 

如果这样，刀不是被告带去的，或者不能证明是他带去的，预谋杀人不成立，很可能结果会是误伤 甚至过度正当防卫

If defense were able to demonstrate, it was not premeditated actions, knife was not brought to the scene by the accused, some degree of self defense went too far, defendant could get a manslaughter to a degree, sentencing to anything from 5-15 years max

签名要求死刑也是以徒劳的事情，首先两国法律不一样，对待死刑大多数发达国家态度是一致的，被告杀人罪名成立不代表其他的人有权利剥夺他的生命，签名要求极刑的是针对性质极其恶劣的犯罪日本有这个，这种案子真算不上。他冲动杀人的面很大，因为本来也不是去杀江的，如果他是预谋杀人，可是为什么杀了一个不再去杀他本来要杀的人？


The petition was pathetic too, different jurisdictions, was the crime that ruthless? Reckless? Was the defendant that cold blood? He basically pissed his pants and ran off after he stabbed the victim. It was a rational, impulsive action, defendable. If the door was unlocked, he could carry on with his destined plan, go inside the house and commit another murder where if the prosecution would call premeditated, I do see it.
来自留园官方客户端